23 ms·
I'm running into a similar issue and fairly new to angular. In fact, the tutorial I followed even set up the server calls to use the _id field when looking at
by binofbread 13y ago
I'm running into a similar issue and fairly new to angular. In fact, the tutorial I followed even set up the server calls to use the _id field when looking at a specific model (ie leagues/{{ league._id }} ). What's the proper way to go about fixing this?
- psgibbs 13y agoYou can always create functions that refer to the private element: MyObject.prototype.id = function(){return this._id;}; Which gives you: leagues/{{ league.id() }}
- camus2 13y agoso what the point of introducing a "private" access modifier that doesnt exist in javascript since one can still access privates? looks like pure politics within google. A breaking change like that shoved at the latest minute? you bet it is.
- btford 13y ago> shoved at the latest minute The pull request was opened 3 weeks ago with plenty of discussion.
- camus2 13y agowhy didnt you think about having this feature optional? class based controllers are optional yet,because of them you introduce a feature that affect function based controllers ?
- btford 13y ago> why didnt you think about having this feature optional? Opt-in security features aren't very useful. > class based controllers are optional yet,because of them you introduce a feature that affect function based controllers ? That's how competing constraints work out sometimes. We're always looking to improve though. The code is open source, so feel free to submit a PR or fork it if you disagree. :)
- thatthatis 13y ago3 weeks of discussion for a breaking change is "last minute" in my book
- 1qaz2wsx3edc 13y agoDon't use 1.2.0 until it's reverted or write a getter.